Every U.S. tariff needs a law behind it, and in 2026 the law matters as much as the rate. As of October 2026, six statutes do the heavy lifting: IEEPA (now off the table for tariffs), Section 232, Section 301, Section 122, Section 201 and Section 338. Each one has a different decision-maker, different limits, and very different odds of getting your money back.
This is the reference version: one section per authority, a comparison table, and a checklist for figuring out which ones are actually on your entries.
The legal authority behind a duty decides three things for an importer: how fast it can change, whether it can be challenged in court, and whether it can be refunded. The Supreme Court's February ruling in Learning Resources made that concrete. Duties paid under IEEPA are now being refunded, while duties paid under Section 232 or 301 generally come back only through drawback.
Since February, the government has rebuilt most of the tariff wall on other statutes. Section 122 bridged the gap for 150 days, then country-level Section 301 duties took over on July 24 (Dorsey & Whitney). The rates look similar on an invoice. The law underneath them is not.
Here is how the six authorities compare as of October 8, 2026. Details and sources for each follow below.
Authority | Statute | Who decides | Limit on rate / duration | Process required | Status, Oct. 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IEEPA | 50 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq. | President | None for tariffs: Supreme Court held it doesn't authorize them | National emergency declaration | No longer collected since Feb. 24, 2026; refunds via CAPE |
Section 232 | 19 U.S.C. § 1862 | President, after Commerce investigation | No statutory cap on rate or duration | Commerce national-security investigation (up to 270 days) | Active: steel, aluminum, copper, autos, trucks, lumber, chips, pharma |
Section 301 | 19 U.S.C. § 2411 | U.S. Trade Representative | No statutory cap; four-year review | USTR investigation, public comment | Active: China duties plus 10%/12.5% country duties since July 24, 2026; country duties challenged at CIT |
Section 122 | 19 U.S.C. § 2132 | President | 15% max, 150 days unless Congress extends | None beyond a balance-of-payments finding | Expired July 24, 2026; CIT ruled it unlawful, ruling stayed on appeal |
Section 201 | 19 U.S.C. § 2251 | President, after ITC injury finding | Up to 50% above existing rate; 4 years, 8 max with extensions | Industry petition, ITC investigation | Solar safeguard expired Feb. 6, 2026 |
Section 338 | 19 U.S.C. § 1338 | President | Up to 50%, then a full import ban | Finding of discrimination; no investigation | Active on Canada: 50% duties, bans since Sept. 29, 2026 |
HOW THE LEGAL BASIS SHIFTED IN 2026
Feb. 20. Supreme Court holds in Learning Resources that IEEPA did not authorize the tariffs.
Feb. 24. CBP stops collecting IEEPA duties; a 10% Section 122 surcharge starts.
May 7. Court of International Trade rules the Section 122 surcharge unlawful, for three plaintiffs only.
July 24. Section 122 expires; country-level Section 301 duties of 10% or 12.5% take over.
Sept. 29. Section 338 duties on certain Canadian goods become import bans.
Up next. A CIT ruling on the country-level Section 301 duties, argued Sept. 30, and a Federal Circuit decision on Section 122.
IEEPA
IEEPA, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq.), is a 1977 sanctions law that lets the President regulate transactions during a declared national emergency, and it can no longer be used to impose tariffs. In 2025 it was the legal basis for the fentanyl tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China and the worldwide "reciprocal" tariffs.
2026 use: none for tariffs. On Feb. 20, 2026, the Supreme Court held in Learning Resources v. Trump that IEEPA did not authorize them. That is a statutory ruling, not a constitutional one (Venable). CBP stopped collecting IEEPA duties at 12:00 a.m. ET on Feb. 24, 2026 (Crane Worldwide).
Refunds: yes, through CBP's CAPE process in ACE. As of Sept. 11, 2026, CBP had accepted $134.7 billion in claims and sent $122 billion to Treasury, with $1.3 billion across 20,184 refunds stuck on missing ACH details (GHY International). Phase 3, for finally liquidated entries of plaintiffs who filed importer numbers by July 30, opened Oct. 6 (CBP).
Status: off the tariff table. The live question is refunds, not rates.
Section 232
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. § 1862) lets the President adjust imports of a product that the Commerce Department finds threatens national security, with no statutory cap on the rate or how long it lasts. It targets products, not countries, though proclamations often carve out country-specific rates.
2026 use: the busiest authority on the books. Steel, aluminum and copper articles pay 50% under an overhaul effective April 6, 2026; autos and parts 25%; medium and heavy trucks 25% and buses 10%; softwood lumber 10%, with higher rates on upholstered furniture and cabinets; 25% on certain advanced chips (Covington). Patented pharmaceuticals face 100% from July 31, 2026, or 15% from the EU, Japan, Korea, Switzerland and Liechtenstein (Crowell & Moring).
Refunds and challenges: courts have historically deferred to the President on national security, so lawsuits are a long shot. The practical recovery route is duty drawback on goods you export or destroy.
Status: active and expanding. Investigations into aircraft, polysilicon, drones, wind turbines, medical supplies and robotics were opened in 2025 (Covington).
Section 301
Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. § 2411) lets the U.S. Trade Representative impose duties on a country after an investigation finds its trade practices unfair or burdensome to U.S. commerce. It targets countries, not products, and requires notice, public comment and a hearing.
2026 use: two layers. The China duties from 2018–2019 (Lists 1 through 4A, 7.5% to 25%, plus later increases) are still in place. On July 24, 2026, USTR added country-level duties after a forced-labor investigation: 10% on 17 economies including Canada, Mexico, India and the UK; a 10% floor for the EU and Taiwan; a 12.5% floor for Japan, Korea and Switzerland; and 12.5% on 38 others, including China and Vietnam (Dorsey & Whitney). Goods already under Section 232 are exempt from the new layer.
Refunds and challenges: the Federal Circuit upheld the China List 3 and 4A duties in 2025 (Kelley Drye), and the Supreme Court declined to review it (Barnes Richardson). The new country-level duties are being challenged at the Court of International Trade, which heard argument on Sept. 30 (MLex). Section 301 duties are drawback-eligible.
Status: active. No ruling on the country-level case yet, and a separate USTR investigation into excess industrial capacity could add more duties (Dorsey & Whitney).
Section 122
Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. § 2132) lets the President impose an import surcharge of up to 15% for up to 150 days to address serious balance-of-payments problems, without an investigation. Only Congress can extend it.
2026 use: a 10% surcharge on nearly all imports under Proclamation 11012, from Feb. 24 to July 24, 2026 (Gibson Dunn).
Refunds and challenges: on May 7, 2026, a split CIT panel held the surcharge unlawful in Oregon v. Trump, but ordered refunds only for three plaintiffs (Gibson Dunn). The Federal Circuit stayed that order on June 11, and as of September no merits decision or CBP refund program existed (Strix).
Status: expired, with refunds unresolved. CAPE does not cover Section 122 duties.
Section 201
Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. § 2251) is the "safeguard" law: after the U.S. International Trade Commission finds that rising imports seriously injure a domestic industry, the President can impose temporary relief. Duties can run up to 50% above the existing rate, for up to four years, extendable to eight in total (Congressional Research Service).
2026 use: winding down. The solar cell and module safeguard, first imposed in 2018 and extended in 2022, expired on Feb. 6, 2026 (PV Time).
Refunds and challenges: safeguards apply to all sources equally and follow a formal ITC record, so they are hard to attack in court. Drawback is the main recovery route.
Status: rarely used, because it starts with an industry petition and a months-long ITC investigation.
Section 338
Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1338) lets the President impose duties of up to 50% on a country that discriminates against U.S. commerce, and then exclude its goods entirely if the discrimination continues. It requires no investigation or comment period (Morrison Foerster).
2026 use: Canada, in what appears to be the statute's first use to impose tariffs. 50% duties took effect Aug. 22 on roughly $20 billion of Canadian goods, and on Sept. 29 certain dairy, alcoholic beverage and motor vehicle products moved from a 50% duty to a full import ban (Dorsey & Whitney).
Refunds and challenges: no court has ruled on Section 338 tariffs, so nobody knows how far it reaches. A banned good has no duty to refund. It simply can't be entered.
Status: active, with Canadian autos and parts floated as a possible next target.
What to do about it
Read the Chapter 99 lines on every entry summary. Each authority shows up as its own 9903 heading next to your base HTS code. That is the only reliable way to know which laws hit a given shipment.
Sort duties paid by authority and date. IEEPA duties stop at Feb. 24, 2026; Section 122 runs Feb. 24 to July 24; the country-level Section 301 layer starts July 24. Refund eligibility differs for each bucket.
Claim your IEEPA refunds through CAPE. Confirm ACH enrollment first, since that is what held up $1.3 billion. If you'd rather not run it in-house, IEEPA refund services like Evana can help. Evana isn't a brokerage, but its team of licensed customs brokers files the CAPE claims.
Protect your Section 122 position. No refund program exists, so ask trade counsel whether to file at the CIT or protest within 180 days of liquidation.
Use drawback for 232 and 301 duties. If you export or destroy imported goods, or goods made from them, drawback can recover up to 99% of those duties.
Check the carve-outs. Goods under Section 232 skip the new country-level Section 301 duties, and EU, Japanese, Korean, Swiss and Taiwanese goods face a floor rather than a flat add-on. A tariff stack analysis like Evana's can show where you're overpaying.
Our read
The 2026 lesson is that the rate on the invoice is only half the story. One emergency statute has been replaced by a patchwork of investigation-based laws that are slower to impose and harder to knock down in court, which makes them more durable. The open legal risk now sits in two places: the CIT's ruling on the country-level Section 301 duties and the Federal Circuit's call on Section 122. Until those land, keep your entry data organized by authority. Refund rights will follow the statute, not the rate.
Related on Trade Talk: IEEPA Refunds by the Numbers · Canada Tariffs Become an Import Ban on Sept. 29 · Duty Drawback, Explained
Got questions? Drop a comment below. Ask our licensed customs brokers, and they'll get right back to you here in the comments.
THE TRADE TALK DESK
Trade, tariffs, and duties — explained plainly.